1. It's simple and free.
2. Your username cannot be used by guests.
3. You can personalise your profile picture.
4. Comments remain editable for 5 mins after submitting.
5. There are no captchas when you submit a comment.
6. You are informed of replies to your comments.
7. Your comments are archived for future reference.

TYT - Income inequality video CEOs don't want you to see

(16:27) If Michael Norton's research is to be believed, Americans don't have the faintest clue how severe economic inequality has become - and if they only knew, they'd be appalled. Cenk Uygur breaks it down.

if humanity is to thrive and prosper on this earth with it's limited resources, the capitalist system must go and it must be replaced with a socialsit, eco friendly, renewable energy/matter direct democracy.

If the people who run us like the capitalist system, then they should invest in SPACE TRAVEL, SPACE MINING, otherwise, humanity will eventually destroy their beloved capitalism because it's a ponzi scheme based on a limited earth and shit don't fly well.

So there you have it you fu*king capitalist, fascist, corporate, amoral, banker/CEO thieves, if you want to keep the capitalist syste then you have to invest in space travel and space mining because we need more than one earth to keep your ponzi scheme going, and only the vast resources of outer space will make that happen.

if humanity is to thrive and prosper on this earth with it's limited resources, the capitalist system must go and it must be replaced with a socialsit, eco friendly, renewable energy/matter direct democracy.

If the people who run us like the capitalist system, then they should invest in SPACE TRAVEL, SPACE MINING, otherwise, humanity will eventually destroy their beloved capitalism because it's a ponzi scheme based on a limited earth and shit don't fly well.

So there you have it you fu*king capitalist, fascist, corporate, amoral, banker/CEO thieves, if you want to keep the capitalist syste then you have to invest in space travel and space mining because we need more than one earth to keep your ponzi scheme going, and only the vast resources of outer space will make that happen.

Get to work!

Add your reply

Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code

Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL

cengland0(1256 days ago)

Income inequality is not an issue. It’s a good thing and this is the capitalistic way. Go to Sweden if you want socialism and income equality. The 92% of Americans that said this is what they want are probably the same people being paid by the tax dollars from the rich because they are on the welfare system. The poor are the ones that want equality — not the hard working and risk taking people that become rich.

An average CEO that makes $12 million versus the average worker that makes $34,000 is fair. As usual, Cenk completely ignores the value of strategic thinking of a typical CEO. He is assuming that the ditch digger that is making that $34,000 is capable of doing the same job the CEO does. The CEO’s is responsible for the success or failure of a company. You can replace a typical worker with the next applicant but replacing a CEO can put a company into bankruptcy.

CEO talent comes at a premium — just like other highly paid jobs. a brain surgeon makes more than the pizza delivery boy for the same reason.

Cenk’s example of a higher paid CEO doing worse than a lower paid CEO can be valid if you only look at a small subset of CEOs. Generally speaking, a company replacing a CEO hires a recruiting company to find a CEO and if he is any good, he is probably already working at a major corporation. Offering the CEO $34,000 will not be enough to encourage him/her to quit their existing job and work for your company. You need to give them a good incentive and that’s where the high pay comes in.

These CEO jobs are not usually published in the newspaper and people don’t usually apply for the position. You are sought after and only if you are running a successful company now.

So here’s the good part. If you have investments in any corporations, you have a vote on who the board of directors and CEO will be (as long as a single person doesn’t own a majority stake). Since the investors picked those people, they are okay with it and then you guys that don’t have any vested interest in those company should not care. Why should you care how much a CEO makes in a company you do not have an investment in?

Regarding the graph comparing productivity with income, that has been debunked so many times that I’m tired of talking about it. Of course productivity increases as companies invest in technology. This does not mean the employee is working harder or are more educated or anything else. It just means the company produces more due to their investments in robots, computers, self-service stations, etc.

His comment saying that we merged big business and the state together is funny. That’s the definition of communism and what most of you boreme users want anyway.

Cenk says, “Get money of out politics,” and “go to Wolf-pack dot com to donate.” Seems hypocritical and contradictory to me.

Income inequality is not an issue. It’s a good thing and this is the capitalistic way. Go to Sweden if you want socialism and income equality. The 92% of Americans that said this is what they want are probably the same people being paid by the tax dollars from the rich because they are on the welfare system. The poor are the ones that want equality — not the hard working and risk taking people that become rich.

An average CEO that makes $12 million versus the average worker that makes $34,000 is fair. As usual, Cenk completely ignores the value of strategic thinking of a typical CEO. He is assuming that the ditch digger that is making that $34,000 is capable of doing the same job the CEO does. The CEO’s is responsible for the success or failure of a company. You can replace a typical worker with the next applicant but replacing a CEO can put a company into bankruptcy.

CEO talent comes at a premium — just like other highly paid jobs. a brain surgeon makes more than the pizza delivery boy for the same reason.

Cenk’s example of a higher paid CEO doing worse than a lower paid CEO can be valid if you only look at a small subset of CEOs. Generally speaking, a company replacing a CEO hires a recruiting company to find a CEO and if he is any good, he is probably already working at a major corporation. Offering the CEO $34,000 will not be enough to encourage him/her to quit their existing job and work for your company. You need to give them a good incentive and that’s where the high pay comes in.

These CEO jobs are not usually published in the newspaper and people don’t usually apply for the position. You are sought after and only if you are running a successful company now.

So here’s the good part. If you have investments in any corporations, you have a vote on who the board of directors and CEO will be (as long as a single person doesn’t own a majority stake). Since the investors picked those people, they are okay with it and then you guys that don’t have any vested interest in those company should not care. Why should you care how much a CEO makes in a company you do not have an investment in?

Regarding the graph comparing productivity with income, that has been debunked so many times that I’m tired of talking about it. Of course productivity increases as companies invest in technology. This does not mean the employee is working harder or are more educated or anything else. It just means the company produces more due to their investments in robots, computers, self-service stations, etc.

His comment saying that we merged big business and the state together is funny. That’s the definition of communism and what most of you boreme users want anyway.

Cenk says, “Get money of out politics,” and “go to Wolf-pack dot com to donate.” Seems hypocritical and contradictory to me.

Add your reply

Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code

Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL

Guest:
(1256 days ago)

"The 92% of Americans that said this is what they want are probably the same people being paid by the tax dollars from the rich because they are on the welfare system."

So basically you said the poll was not representative. If the poll represent the opinion of the people, there is clrealy something wrong about the society the majority want and what they get. Because they don't know the data. Simple as that.

"The 92% of Americans that said this is what they want are probably the same people being paid by the tax dollars from the rich because they are on the welfare system."

So basically you said the poll was not representative. If the poll represent the opinion of the people, there is clrealy something wrong about the society the majority want and what they get. Because they don't know the data. Simple as that.

Add your reply

Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code

Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL

Guest:
wolf78(1256 days ago)

If you mean by the CEO being responsible, you mean him going to jail or paying for the failure of the buisness, then yes by all means pay him his due! I have not see a single CEO or buisness pay up recently or admit any responsibility...

If you mean by the CEO being responsible, you mean him going to jail or paying for the failure of the buisness, then yes by all means pay him his due! I have not see a single CEO or buisness pay up recently or admit any responsibility...

Add your reply

Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code

Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL

cengland0(1255 days ago)

That is because the CEO did not break any money laundering laws. If the CEO did, the authorities would finally have some reason to make an arrest but, as it stands right now, the CEO was not prosecuted. Why admit responsibility for the illegal actions of one of your employees?

If a person own a small business, let's say an air conditioning installation business, and has 250 employees. Then one day, one of the employees robs a convenient store. Should the air conditioning installation business owner go to jail? See how ridiculous that sounds?

That is because the CEO did not break any money laundering laws. If the CEO did, the authorities would finally have some reason to make an arrest but, as it stands right now, the CEO was not prosecuted. Why admit responsibility for the illegal actions of one of your employees?

If a person own a small business, let's say an air conditioning installation business, and has 250 employees. Then one day, one of the employees robs a convenient store. Should the air conditioning installation business owner go to jail? See how ridiculous that sounds?

Add your reply

Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code

Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL

Guest:
pffffftt(1256 days ago)

You really are an amoral ******** of a human being .. the fact that you state "Income inequality is not an issue.": plus

"The 92% of Americans that said this is what they want are probably the same people being paid by the tax dollars from the rich because they are on the welfare system".

Means that you really have no moral compass and when the whirlwird hits, you'll be happily sitting there on your porch going WTF? Good luck digging that bunker

Can you name a time when there wasn't a king or queen or chief of the village? There has always been inequality and it is what drives people to work hard and to take risks in their life.

At least in the USA, almost everyone can become a CEO or the President. What are your chances you can become King of England? Zero chance is the answer.

Communism did not work if you get paid the same no matter much effort you put into your career.

Add your reply

Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code

Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL

Guest:
Seve Ballustrade(1256 days ago)

Has no-one else figured out that cengland0 is an astro-turfer? He/she has endless time to propogate extreme right wing views much like other turfers? LINK

To be fair he/she is better than most, but if you realise that all comments are to support an agenda then maybe people will learn to ignore him/her.

Notice how the statements cengland0 generates are designed to label any contrary point of view as communist, and that there are strong ties to emotional triggers to counter any view that don't suit the agenda.

Search on cengland0 to see the incredible amount of posts, all with a common theme - any challenge to the status quo is bombarded with non-intellectual garbage. Also notice the patterns in the replies. I cannot believe that any rational thinking human being can be so one-dimensional, and also have so much time to monitor all threads that may take an alternative point of view.

Has no-one else figured out that cengland0 is an astro-turfer? He/she has endless time to propogate extreme right wing views much like other turfers? LINK

To be fair he/she is better than most, but if you realise that all comments are to support an agenda then maybe people will learn to ignore him/her.

Notice how the statements cengland0 generates are designed to label any contrary point of view as communist, and that there are strong ties to emotional triggers to counter any view that don't suit the agenda.

Search on cengland0 to see the incredible amount of posts, all with a common theme - any challenge to the status quo is bombarded with non-intellectual garbage. Also notice the patterns in the replies. I cannot believe that any rational thinking human being can be so one-dimensional, and also have so much time to monitor all threads that may take an alternative point of view.

Add your reply

Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code

Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL

cengland0(1255 days ago)

I express my views in an attempt to correct errors and misinformation that is being spread. If you read my first post in this thread, you can see I directly address the problems regarding the specific video.

I am not paid to spread my views.

Here are my stances: Pro private health care. Pro education but should be funded by people who use it. Pro scientific research. Fire department should be privatized and funded by people that use the service. Pro guns. Anti War. Pro defense and police tax dollar budgets. I have no stance on religion except that I personally am an atheist but I could care less what religion other people are.

I never considered myself right-wing but I am pro capitalism and that can create inequalities where the lazy get less of the pie and the hard workers get more of the pie. I am a libertarian. I am pro banking and work for a bank. I am pro corporations and invest in them and own my own businesses. I believe in freedom of speech to the point that corporations should be allowed to speak their mind even if that is for or against a political candidate. Pro choice. Homosexuals should have the same rights as straight people. People of all races are equals. Women are equal to men.

I express my views in an attempt to correct errors and misinformation that is being spread. If you read my first post in this thread, you can see I directly address the problems regarding the specific video.

I am not paid to spread my views.

Here are my stances: Pro private health care. Pro education but should be funded by people who use it. Pro scientific research. Fire department should be privatized and funded by people that use the service. Pro guns. Anti War. Pro defense and police tax dollar budgets. I have no stance on religion except that I personally am an atheist but I could care less what religion other people are.

I never considered myself right-wing but I am pro capitalism and that can create inequalities where the lazy get less of the pie and the hard workers get more of the pie. I am a libertarian. I am pro banking and work for a bank. I am pro corporations and invest in them and own my own businesses. I believe in freedom of speech to the point that corporations should be allowed to speak their mind even if that is for or against a political candidate. Pro choice. Homosexuals should have the same rights as straight people. People of all races are equals. Women are equal to men.

Add your reply

Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code

Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL

Guest:
Gizas(1256 days ago)

We always said he's paid to do this, but arguing with trolls and trolling is a hobby for a lot of people on the internet.

Russia employs trolls, why not the US via NSA and CIA? it's plausible...

You are a ******* brick Cengland0 - your social attitude is way below normal human behavior..

Add your reply

Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code

Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL

WalterEgo(1256 days ago)

There's no shortage of talented people. There are great doctors, great detectives, great dads, great dancers... and great crooks.

Knowing how to best buy off politicians is a talent. Having the balls to money launder to the tune of $800 billion is a talent. Escaping jail when you shouldn't is a talent. But like great crooks, none of these talents are welcome because they are destructive to society.

There's no shortage of talented people. There are great doctors, great detectives, great dads, great dancers... and great crooks.

Knowing how to best buy off politicians is a talent. Having the balls to money launder to the tune of $800 billion is a talent. Escaping jail when you shouldn't is a talent. But like great crooks, none of these talents are welcome because they are destructive to society.

Add your reply

Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code

Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL

cengland0(1256 days ago)

The CEO did not launder any money. If you own a business, are you responsible for the criminal activity of all the hundreds of thousands of employees that work for you? No. And, it shouldn't change. You would like to see the CEO prosecuted but in reality, the tellers that committed the crime should be the one prosecuted.

The CEO did not launder any money. If you own a business, are you responsible for the criminal activity of all the hundreds of thousands of employees that work for you? No. And, it shouldn't change. You would like to see the CEO prosecuted but in reality, the tellers that committed the crime should be the one prosecuted.

Add your reply

Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code

Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL

WalterEgo(1256 days ago)

There were 3 CEOs over a 10 year period. And HSBC were warned several times by regulators.

If the CEOs were unaware of what was going on, then they were incompetent and should be stripped of their bonuses and banned from running a business. Otherwise they should be behind bars. Don't forget, $800 billion was what the bank admitted to, god only knows what the real figure is.

And it wasn't just HSBC. Why don't you tell us about Bank of America's money laundering strategy? It would make for interesting reading.

There were 3 CEOs over a 10 year period. And HSBC were warned several times by regulators.

If the CEOs were unaware of what was going on, then they were incompetent and should be stripped of their bonuses and banned from running a business. Otherwise they should be behind bars. Don't forget, $800 billion was what the bank admitted to, god only knows what the real figure is.

And it wasn't just HSBC. Why don't you tell us about Bank of America's money laundering strategy? It would make for interesting reading.

Add your reply

Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code

Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL

cengland0(1255 days ago)

“If the CEOs were unaware of what was going on, then they were incompetent and should be stripped of their bonuses and banned from running a business.” If the CEO needs to know everything that all hundreds of thousands of employees do on a daily basis, they need to get paid a whole lot more than they get paid today. That’s why they have presidents, executives, senior vice presidents, vice presidents, officers, and managers. Each one of those has the responsibility for portion of the business and it gets smaller as the management level gets lower.

I am finally understanding why you are so jealous of the rich people and why you hate corporations so much. You don’t understand them. You think all that is done is you put in a hundred dollar investment and you sit back and let the billions roll in with very little to do on a daily basis. In your model, the Walmart CEO knows every little problem that is going on in every store across the country and should go to jail if a customer slips on a grape and falls.

“If the CEOs were unaware of what was going on, then they were incompetent and should be stripped of their bonuses and banned from running a business.” If the CEO needs to know everything that all hundreds of thousands of employees do on a daily basis, they need to get paid a whole lot more than they get paid today. That’s why they have presidents, executives, senior vice presidents, vice presidents, officers, and managers. Each one of those has the responsibility for portion of the business and it gets smaller as the management level gets lower.

I am finally understanding why you are so jealous of the rich people and why you hate corporations so much. You don’t understand them. You think all that is done is you put in a hundred dollar investment and you sit back and let the billions roll in with very little to do on a daily basis. In your model, the Walmart CEO knows every little problem that is going on in every store across the country and should go to jail if a customer slips on a grape and falls.

Add your reply

Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code

Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL

WalterEgo(1255 days ago)

The CEOs were aware because the regulators told them, several times in fact. So they should be behind bars don't you think?

The CEOs were aware because the regulators told them, several times in fact. So they should be behind bars don't you think?

Add your reply

Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code

Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL

cengland0(1255 days ago)

You still have the idea that the CEO should be responsible for the illegal actions of employees that work for the company. The law does not work that way -- thank goodness.

If that air conditioning company owner was notified by the police that one of their employees robbed a convenient store and then 6 months later another employee (or even the same employee) robbed another convenient store, should the air conditioning company owner go to jail?

Now regarding your statement about HSBC being told that there was illegal money laundering going on in Mexico, can you show me evidence of that and who specifically was notified of the issue? A cursory search using Google did not reveal any. I’d like to see that they were told, ignored it, and then it happened again. Not that they were told and then they were fined after the first time they were notified. I’d like to know if the CEO was the person notified or was it the branch manager.

You still have the idea that the CEO should be responsible for the illegal actions of employees that work for the company. The law does not work that way -- thank goodness.

If that air conditioning company owner was notified by the police that one of their employees robbed a convenient store and then 6 months later another employee (or even the same employee) robbed another convenient store, should the air conditioning company owner go to jail?

Now regarding your statement about HSBC being told that there was illegal money laundering going on in Mexico, can you show me evidence of that and who specifically was notified of the issue? A cursory search using Google did not reveal any. I’d like to see that they were told, ignored it, and then it happened again. Not that they were told and then they were fined after the first time they were notified. I’d like to know if the CEO was the person notified or was it the branch manager.

Add your reply

Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code

Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL

WalterEgo(1255 days ago)

We've been through all of this before. You can read a good account on Rolling Stone that reads like a thriller - LINK

About the warnings (and there were others): "In April 2003, with 9/11 still fresh in the minds of American regulators, the Federal Reserve sent HSBC's American subsidiary a cease-and-desist­ letter, ordering it to clean up its act and make a better effort to keep criminals and terrorists from opening accounts at its bank..."

What is it with your refusal to accept reality? I can't figure out whether you're a true believer in what you spout, even if it makes no sense - like a religious fanatic, or whether you know you're making no sense but can't admit it - like a politician. Which are you?

We've been through all of this before. You can read a good account on Rolling Stone that reads like a thriller - LINK

About the warnings (and there were others): "In April 2003, with 9/11 still fresh in the minds of American regulators, the Federal Reserve sent HSBC's American subsidiary a cease-and-desist­ letter, ordering it to clean up its act and make a better effort to keep criminals and terrorists from opening accounts at its bank..."

What is it with your refusal to accept reality? I can't figure out whether you're a true believer in what you spout, even if it makes no sense - like a religious fanatic, or whether you know you're making no sense but can't admit it - like a politician. Which are you?

Add your reply

Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code

Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL

cengland0(1255 days ago)

“What is it with your refusal to accept reality?” You want to criminalize the CEO for something there is no evidence of criminal activity performed by the CEO. We do not put people in jail without evidence and those are the facts of reality. Maybe you want to go back to Nazi Germany or Communist Russia and live in those realities but I want to live in a world where I must actually be proven guilty before being sentenced to jail.

So you think the rolling stone reporting that someone in America being notified to do a better job trying to stop terrorists from opening accounts that the CEO of a UK headquartered company should be prosecuted and sent to jail?

Let me put it this way. The CEO was not prosecuted because there wasn’t any hard evidence of illegal activity. You believe there was but unless you have evidence, your suspicions is not enough to put someone in prison. Thank goodness we have a policy of innocent until proven guilty here or everyone would be going to jail for things they are only suspected of doing.

“What is it with your refusal to accept reality?” You want to criminalize the CEO for something there is no evidence of criminal activity performed by the CEO. We do not put people in jail without evidence and those are the facts of reality. Maybe you want to go back to Nazi Germany or Communist Russia and live in those realities but I want to live in a world where I must actually be proven guilty before being sentenced to jail.

So you think the rolling stone reporting that someone in America being notified to do a better job trying to stop terrorists from opening accounts that the CEO of a UK headquartered company should be prosecuted and sent to jail?

Let me put it this way. The CEO was not prosecuted because there wasn’t any hard evidence of illegal activity. You believe there was but unless you have evidence, your suspicions is not enough to put someone in prison. Thank goodness we have a policy of innocent until proven guilty here or everyone would be going to jail for things they are only suspected of doing.

Add your reply

Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code

Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL

WalterEgo(1255 days ago)

Talking of Nazis, should Hitler (had he survived) have been prosecuted for gassing millions of Jews, or should you just prosecute those who actually turned the taps?

" The CEO was not prosecuted because there wasn’t any hard evidence of illegal activity. " Actually, you're wrong and you know it. We've spoken about this before. US authorities themselves explained why they didn't prosecute saying - "a $1.9bn fine for a litany of offences was preferable to the 'collateral consequences' of taking the bank to court..." LINK

Talking of Nazis, should Hitler (had he survived) have been prosecuted for gassing millions of Jews, or should you just prosecute those who actually turned the taps?

" The CEO was not prosecuted because there wasn’t any hard evidence of illegal activity. " Actually, you're wrong and you know it. We've spoken about this before. US authorities themselves explained why they didn't prosecute saying - "a $1.9bn fine for a litany of offences was preferable to the 'collateral consequences' of taking the bank to court..." LINK

So did you just lie on purpose, or did you have a lapse of memory?

Add your reply

Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code

Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL

cengland0(1253 days ago)

Many Nazi’s were prosecuted for their war crimes and were hanged. Look up the Nuremberg trials for more info. I’m pretty sure if they captured Hitler alive, he would have been tried as well. It would have been up to court procedures to determine his guilt and not up to you and your hate for the banks to make that decision.

Your link was a strawman fallacy. It did not prove that the CEO was guilty of any crime. It just states that they did not want to pull the US license of the bank because so many US jobs would be lost so a fine was preferred to pulling that license.

Also, when you said earlier that everyone was able to keep their bonuses, that article said, “The bank's top executives will defer part of their bonuses for the whole of the five-year period, while bonuses have been clawed back from a number of former and current executives, including those in the US directly involved at the time.”

Not all cases go to trial and that is not just in the banking sector. There are drug companies that produce substances that are later found to cause cancer. People that use those drugs hire lawyers and the situation gets discussed between the individual’s lawyers and the drug company’s lawyers. A settlement offer is usually made and if it’s acceptable to the individual, they sign papers accepting it and it never goes to trial.

Many Nazi’s were prosecuted for their war crimes and were hanged. Look up the Nuremberg trials for more info. I’m pretty sure if they captured Hitler alive, he would have been tried as well. It would have been up to court procedures to determine his guilt and not up to you and your hate for the banks to make that decision.

Your link was a strawman fallacy. It did not prove that the CEO was guilty of any crime. It just states that they did not want to pull the US license of the bank because so many US jobs would be lost so a fine was preferred to pulling that license.

Also, when you said earlier that everyone was able to keep their bonuses, that article said, “The bank's top executives will defer part of their bonuses for the whole of the five-year period, while bonuses have been clawed back from a number of former and current executives, including those in the US directly involved at the time.”

Not all cases go to trial and that is not just in the banking sector. There are drug companies that produce substances that are later found to cause cancer. People that use those drugs hire lawyers and the situation gets discussed between the individual’s lawyers and the drug company’s lawyers. A settlement offer is usually made and if it’s acceptable to the individual, they sign papers accepting it and it never goes to trial.

Add your reply

Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code

Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL

Guest:
Guest God(1253 days ago)

If I know one person would mke me more money than 300 person I would fire 300 and hire that one person. What would you do?

Anyone talking inequality is idiot.

The guy on the video is idiot.

People watching this video are idiot.

Makinfg comments about the content of the video are idiot.

Cangland is idiot.

This site is idiot.

People who will sue me for telling them that they are idiot are idiot.

Lawyers are idiot.

The judge who will sentence me to $4217 for this message is idiot.

The police who will take me to jail lfor not being able to pay for $4355 are idiot.

I don't hate banks, I hate injustice. Remove the injustice and I will love banks.

Also, I never said everyone was able to keep their bonuses, although defering part of your bonus for five years is pretty much the same as keeping it. It's not as if bankers are going to go hungry for five years while waiting for their millions.

So when you said: " The CEO was not prosecuted because there wasn’t any hard evidence of illegal activity ", did you make a mistake?

I don't hate banks, I hate injustice. Remove the injustice and I will love banks.

Also, I never said everyone was able to keep their bonuses, although defering part of your bonus for five years is pretty much the same as keeping it. It's not as if bankers are going to go hungry for five years while waiting for their millions.

So when you said: " The CEO was not prosecuted because there wasn’t any hard evidence of illegal activity ", did you make a mistake?

Add your reply

Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code

Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL

Guest:
Gizas(1255 days ago)

he is basing his opinion on lack of concrete official evidence and he is technically right, but we all know he's full of sheit, so it's pointless.